9.1 p. 232 of 269
Receive Report and Provide Direction on CDBG Program Year 2024-25 Funding Allocations
BACKGROUND
HUD provides annual grants through the CDBG program to local entitlement community grantees, such as the City of Gilroy. The CDBG program provides funding to carry out a wide range of community development activities to revitalize neighborhoods and provide improved community facilities and services. The program’s primary objective is to develop viable communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment, principally for persons of low-and moderate-income. “Persons of low- and moderate-income” are defined as families, households, and individuals whose incomes do not exceed 80% of the County area median income, adjusted for family or household size. The program is authorized under Title 1 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, Public Law 93-383, as amended.
In compliance with federal regulations, entitlement communities develop their own programs and funding priorities meeting one of the following national objectives:
1. Grantees must give maximum feasible priority to activities that benefit low- and moderate-income persons.
2. Grantees may also carry out activities to prevent or eliminate slums or blight.
3. Grantees may fund activities when the grantee certifies that the activities meet other community development needs having a particular urgency because existing conditions pose a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community where other financial resources are not available to meet such needs.
Eligible Activities
The CDBG program is flexible in the types of activities that are eligible for funding, provided that each activity meets a national objective, as outlined above.
The CDBG program allows, but is not limited to, the following activities:
• Acquisition of real property
• Relocation and demolition
• Rehabilitation of residential and non-residential structures • Construction of public facilities and improvements, such as streets and neighborhood centers
• Public services
Generally, the following types of activities are ineligible:
• Acquisition, construction, or reconstruction of buildings for the general conduct of government
• Political activities
ANALYSIS
Program Year (PY) 2024-25 will be a one-year funding cycle for the proposed activities and represents the fifth and final year of the City’s 2020-2025 Consolidated Plan. The City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 9 April 8, 2024
9.1 p. 233 of 269
Receive Report and Provide Direction on CDBG Program Year 2024-25 Funding Allocations Consolidated Plan identifies the community development and housing needs for the City’s residents. CDBG funds must be used to implement priority needs and goals in the Consolidated Plan.
Available Funds
For CDBG PY 2024-25 (July 1, 2024 – June 30, 2025), the City anticipates receiving an estimated $400,000 in CDBG entitlement funding from HUD. Based on the approximate allocation of $400,000, the funding for public services is $60,000 (capped at 15%) and the funding for program administration is $80,000 (capped at 20%), resulting in $260,000 for non-public services.
In addition to the annual allocation, staff has identified $106,645 of unused CDBG prior years’ resources that will also be included in the draft PY 2024-25 Annual Action Plan and allocated to qualified activities. Same as last year, staff has been spending significant efforts assessing CDBG activities and requiring funded entities to complete their projects from prior years. Through these efforts, staff has identified unused CDBG prior years’ resources where projects came in under budget. Note that prior years’ resources may not be allocated to PY 2024-25 public services as the expenditure “cap” limits the amount available for these activities. Therefore, the unexpended prior years’ resources can only be committed toward non-public service activities.
The following table summarizes the available funding and eligible uses for PY 2024-25.
Eligible Uses
Funding Amount Program Public Service
(15% Cap)
Non-Public
Service Administration
(20% Cap)
2024-25 Formula Funds
(Estimate) $400,000 $60,000 $260,000 $80,000
Prior Years’ Resources $106,645
$506,645
-- $106,645
$366,645
--
PY 2024-25 Total $60,000 $80,000
CDBG Applications
The City receives a direct allocation of CDBG funds from HUD each year and is responsible for developing a process to disperse these funds to the community. To facilitate this process, the City conducts public outreach and releases a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for each funding cycle that allows interested parties to directly apply for these funds.
The NOFA for PY 2024-25, including application materials, eligibility criteria, and submittal requirements, was published and released on December 8, 2023, to local organizations, nonprofits, and City departments that may be interested in applying for CDBG funds for the upcoming program year from July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2025.
City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 9 April 8, 2024
9.1 p. 234 of 269
Receive Report and Provide Direction on CDBG Program Year 2024-25 Funding Allocations Staff held a public hearing on December 14, 2023, to review the NOFA and application process and answer applicants’ questions. As described in the application, application instructions, and throughout the public hearing presentation, first-time applicants or applicants with new projects/programs were required to meet with City staff to discuss if their proposed project/program meets CDBG eligibility requirements prior to application submittal. Throughout the process, eligibility criteria also emphasized that applications must meet the national objective of benefitting low- and moderate-income persons; applications must meet Consolidated Plan priority needs; applicants must be nonprofit organizations; and applicants must have audit/financial statements.
Applications were due January 16, 2024. The City received 15 applications, with funding requests totaling $1,138,678.69. A summary of each application’s proposed activity and requested funding is provided in the attachment to this staff report.
Over the past few months, staff has reviewed applications, conducted HUD research, and analyzed a variety of approaches and options to best proceed in getting these funds into the community. While CDBG funds may be used for a wide variety of activities, the City is limited to only utilizing 15% of the total annual allocation on activities that fall under the “public service” grant category, the most requested application category received each year. To facilitate analysis, staff identifies applications as either “public service” or “non-public service” due to the funding restriction.
Non-Public Service Applications
In total, four (4) applications were received that would fall outside of the public service category. Referring to the attachment, Public Works, Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley, The Miller Red Barn, and WeeCare, Inc. requested a total of $790,000 in funding, vs. an estimated $366,645 of funding available for non-public services.
Upon review and in consultation with the City’s HUD representative, staff determined that the WeeCare, Inc. and The Miller Red Barn projects would not be eligible for funding for the following reasons:
o WeeCare, Inc – While micro-enterprise activities are eligible under the CDBG funding, such activities were not identified in the City’s Consolidated Plan Priorities and Goals, which guide staff on what type of activities will be funded over the five-year Consolidated Plan period. Micro-enterprise activities do not meet any of the priority needs sought in the application packet or presented during the NOFA public hearing. The applicant did not meet the City requirement of being a nonprofit organization, did not schedule the required new applicant meeting with City staff, nor did they schedule the required appointment to discuss why they lacked an audit or financial statements (which is a requirement of any agency receiving CDBG funds). These application entry criteria were highlighted multiple times through the application material and the NOFA public hearing presentation. In addition, WeeCare submitted, with their application, an authorization to request funds and authorization to approve/submit financial City of Gilroy City Council Page 4 of 9 April 8, 2024
9.1 p. 235 of 269
Receive Report and Provide Direction on CDBG Program Year 2024-25 Funding Allocations reports to the City of San Jose, instead of Gilroy. For these reasons, this application was deemed ineligible and staff is not recommending this proposal. o The Miller Red Barn – This application was deemed ineligible after reviewing the project scope with the City’s HUD representative who confirmed that the tenant of the property/building, The Miller Red Barn, cannot apply for funding on this project. Staff is unaware of any agreement that is in place between the owner (City) and the tenant, giving the tenant legal authority to request funds on the City’s behalf to perform construction activities.
Consequently, the Public Works Department and Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley would be the only applicants eligible for funding. There is an estimated $260,000 available from the PY 2024-25 entitlement funds for non-public services, which is derived from an estimated $400,000 funding less $60,000 for public services and $80,000 for program administration. In addition to $260,000, staff recommends allocating prior years’ resources of $106,645 to these projects. As both applications are eligible and have received funding from the City in the past, staff recommends allocating the combined $366,645 funds in the following manner – $183,323 for Public Works and $183,322 for Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley.
Public Service Applications
Staff received a total of 11 public service applications for CDBG funding, with funding request totaling $348,678.69. These applications are competing for the estimated $60,000 public service funding pool.
Staff conducted a complete review of the applications and supporting documents submitted, as well as eligibility based on the description given in the application narrative. During this review, staff determined that St. Joseph’s Family Center’s Gilroy Street Team project was ineligible to receive funding as it provides stipends to members. In general, CDBG funds may not be used for income payments. Thus, this application was deemed ineligible and removed from consideration.
The approaches and options listed below account for a total of 10 public service applications as they were all deemed eligible for funding. • Equal Distribution Option – Fund all public service applications equitably with funds available
Result: Fund the remaining 10 eligible public service applications at $6,000 per application (City’s grant minimum is $7,500 per application) Based on this option, the total amount available would be evenly distributed amongst the 10 remaining applications. Based on an estimate of $60,000 available, this would only allow for $6,000 per application. Unfortunately, this low of a dollar amount would not meet the City’s minimum requirement, which is $7,500 per application. This minimum grant amount was established to consider the City of Gilroy City Council Page 5 of 9 April 8, 2024
9.1 p. 236 of 269
Receive Report and Provide Direction on CDBG Program Year 2024-25 Funding Allocations administration costs associated with these federal funds and the amount available to provide actual services. Therefore, while it is an option that was considered, it would not be recommended, and no further analysis was conducted. • Non-Duplication Option – Fund fair housing through program administration; remove duplicative public service applications and those applications that did not meet requirements of the NOFA
Result: Fund fair housing through program administration, remove duplicative public service applications, and fund seven (7) public service applications equally at $8,751.43 per application
➢ This option is staff’s recommendation as the preferred option for allocation.
HUD allows for fair housing activities to either be funded under the public service category or under the program administration category, with both categories having their own “caps.” To maximize available public service funds to be utilized in the community, staff believes the program administration funds are better suited to fund fair housing activities. It should be noted that funding fair housing under program administration will reduce the amount of grant funds available to pay for City staff and consultant time administering the CDBG program – thus General Fund dollars would be impacted by that same amount.
Two of the applications requested funding for fair housing activities – Project Sentinel and Community Agency for Resources, Advocacy and Services (CARAS). Project Sentinel has been administering the City’s fair housing services. In Santa Clara County, Project Sentinel provides fair housing services for Cupertino, Gilroy, Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale.
Staff believes Project Sentinel is the most qualified applicant to implement this program on the City’s behalf to affirmatively further fair housing in the community. Under this scenario, the CARAS fair housing proposal would then be removed from the eligible list as it is a duplicative service. Additionally, CARAS did not meet with staff prior to application submittal as required for new programs, and their application lacked supporting documents that were required to be submitted with a new application.
With the estimated $80,000 for program administration, after funding Project Sentinel’s fair housing services at $22,061, an amount of $57,939 would be available to help fund City staff and consultant time in administering the CDBG program.
The other two applications that proposed duplicative services were homeless prevention services that focus on providing one-time rental assistance to low-income households who are behind in rent and at risk of losing their homes. St. Joseph’s Family Center and CARAS both proposed programs for these services. St. Joseph’s Family Center has been providing rental assistance to Gilroy residents. Staff City of Gilroy City Council Page 6 of 9 April 8, 2024
9.1 p. 237 of 269
Receive Report and Provide Direction on CDBG Program Year 2024-25 Funding Allocations believes it would be more efficient to fund only one of these programs so that they don’t offer a duplicative service. Also, it would remove the risk of funding an applicant twice should they apply to both agencies for assistance and possibly creating a duplication of benefits, which goes against HUD regulations. As with the fair housing application, CARAS did not meet with staff prior to application submittal as required for new programs, and their application for a new activity lacked the required supporting documents that the NOFA requests. Thus, staff would recommend removing this application from the funding pool.
Based on the analysis above, this option would in essence remove three (3) additional applications from the public service funding pool, leaving a total of seven (7) applications. If the estimated $60,000 funds were then distributed equally amongst those seven (7) remaining applications, each would receive $8,571.43. While this is a small allocation, it does meet the minimum $7,500 allocation requirement set by the City.
For a summary of the applications and proposed allocations under this NonDuplication Option, please refer to the attachment.
This option provides funds to meet a variety of priority needs in the community.
Therefore, it is staff’s recommendation as the preferred option for allocation. • Evaluation Based Option – Keep the parameters set by the Non-Duplication Option, but only fund the public service applications with the highest evaluations Result: Fund fair housing through program administration, and fund two (2) public service applications – $40,000 for the South County Compassion Center and $20,000 for The Health Trust
Under this scenario, staff would still recommend the items listed in the NonDuplication Option, where only seven (7) public service applications are to be evaluated. The evaluation method, used in prior years, would utilize the evaluation criteria that were provided in the application and focus the limited dollars available on those applications that rated the highest based on the evaluation criteria. The evaluation focuses on the following categories:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Meeting Consolidated Plan priority needs
Proposed beneficiaries with the lowest targeted income levels Experience of the agency providing proposed/similar service Leveraged funds / percentage of proposed revenue from other funding sources Partnerships and collaboration with other agencies
Measurable outcomes and measurement system
Program performance / meeting goals in past City funded programs Based on the evaluation criteria above – which was provided to the applicants in the NOFA, staff reviewed each application and gave an assessment. The assessment focused on quantitative criteria rather than qualitative efforts. For example, under the City of Gilroy City Council Page 7 of 9 April 8, 2024
9.1 p. 238 of 269
Receive Report and Provide Direction on CDBG Program Year 2024-25 Funding Allocations “proposed beneficiaries with the lowest targeted income levels,” a value was given based on who the applicant stated they would primarily be serving with these funds, with the lowest income group receiving the highest evaluation. Another example would be under the “leveraged funds” category, which rewarded applicants who demonstrated that 25% or higher of the total proposed project revenues were budgeted from other sources. Those applicants with higher leveraged resources received higher evaluation.
Based on the evaluation method, the evaluation rating is listed below from high to low:
1. South County Compassion Center – Outreach for the Unhoused
2. The Health Trust – Meals on Wheels
3. St. Joseph’s Family Center – Homeless Prevention Services
4. Live Oak Adult Day Services – Adult Day Care
5. Sourcewise – Transit Service
6. Project Sentinel – Tenant/Landlord Counseling and Dispute Resolution
7. Community Agency for Resources, Advocacy and Services (CARAS) – RYSE UP II All assessments were extremely close, and staff acknowledges how important all these services are for the community and how deserving all applications are for these funds. Based on this option and methodology, staff would recommend funding the top two applications. This option prioritizes the applications with the highest evaluation and provides them with the most financial assistance in hopes of allowing their programs to operate to the greatest extent possible to ensure the greatest community impact. In this case, the two applications would receive the exact amount requested, which coincidentally equals the estimated public service funding available – $40,000 for the South County Compassion Center and $20,000 for The Health Trust.
For a summary of the applications and proposed allocations under this Evaluation Based Option, please refer to the attachment.
Summary
Due to the limited funding available and the significantly higher applicant funding requests, staff has presented the City Council with three funding approaches/options to seek input and direction on the final activities to be included in the draft Annual Action Plan. In the attachment to this staff report, staff has provided a summary of each application’s proposed activity, requested funding, and the proposed allocation under each option.
Staff recommends that Council receive the staff report and direct staff to proceed with the Non-Duplication Option, or an alternative option proposed by the City Council. Upon direction by the City Council, staff will update the draft Annual Action Plan with the funding recommendation.
City of Gilroy City Council Page 8 of 9 April 8, 2024
9.1 p. 239 of 269
Receive Report and Provide Direction on CDBG Program Year 2024-25 Funding Allocations When the actual amount of PY 2024-25 formula funds is released by HUD, staff will adjust the proposed allocation for each application proportionally to align with the Council direction. Staff will also incorporate such adjustments in the Annual Action Plan.
Staff will return to the City Council on May 6, 2024, for Council to consider approval and adoption of the Annual Action Plan prior to staff submitting it to HUD.
ALTERNATIVES
The City Council may elect not to utilize any of the three funding options stated in this report and allocate the funds as it deems appropriate while staying within the maximum percentages (caps) that HUD allows.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
CDBG funds are allocated by HUD on an annual basis and will be added to the City’s line of credit once the Annual Action Plan is approved by HUD. The PY will begin on July 1, 2024, and end on June 30, 2025.
The CDBG resources are budgeted and expended from the City’s CDBG Fund (Fund 245). The resources and funding recommendations will be included in the City’s budget update.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
A public comment period from April 5 – May 5, 2024, is being held for the PY 2024-25 draft Annual Action Plan to seek community input, as well as a public hearing that will take place on May 6, 2024.
NEXT STEPS
Upon direction by the City Council, staff will update the draft Annual Action Plan with the funding recommendation, and return to the City Council on May 6, 2024, for Council to consider approval and adoption of the Annual Action Plan prior to staff submitting it to HUD.
Attachments:
CDBG Program Year 2024-25 Application Funding Allocation City of Gilroy City Council Page 9 of 9 April 8, 2024
9.1 p. 240 of 269
CDBG Program Year 2024-25 Application Funding Allocation PY 2024-25 Allocation PY 2023-24 Allocation
Estimated
Formula
Funds
Equal
Distribution
Option i
NonDuplication
Option ii
Evaluation
Based Option Applicant
Request
Prior Years'
Resources
Formula
Funds
Prior Years'
Resources Applicant Activity Description
iii
$ 400,000.00 $ 106,645.00 $ 368,433.00 $ 280,466.00
RYSE UP II (Reaching
our Young people to
Succeed and
Empower with
Unlimited Potential)
Community Agency
for Resources,
Advocacy and
Provide support to at-risk youth through crime prevention, gang intervention, youth empowerment, and recreational activities.
Conduct outreach and intake, curriculum sessions, and case management to prevent delinquent behavior.
$
$
25,000.00 $ 6,000.00
6,000.00
$ 8,571.43 $
$
-
-
$ 8,248.15
Services (CARAS)
Community Agency
for Resources,
Advocacy and
Provide one-time rental and deposit assistance, through a partner agency, and soft case management, to extremely low, low, and moderate income Gilroy seniors and individuals, and families with disabilities to prevent housing evictions.
Homeward Bound II 20,000.00 $ $ -
Services (CARAS)
Community Agency
for Resources,
Advocacy and
Provide assistance with illegal evictions, code enforcement Fair Housing Rights violations, rent increases, tenant-landlord disputes, referrals for $ $
$
20,000.00
10,000.00
36,926.00
$
$
$
6,000.00
6,000.00
6,000.00
$
$
$
- $
$
$
-
-
Project legal assistance and homelessness prevention rent and Services (CARAS) deposit support.
Provide specialized adult day care to dependent low-income seniors, including meals, socialization, and structured recreation, to allow them to age in place and avoid or delay institutionalization.
Live Oak Adult Day
Services Adult Day Care 8,571.43 $ 9,704.19
Public services
funded with
formula only
funds
regardless of
option
Provide assistance to tenants and landlords on their respective rights and responsibilities regarding terminations, evictions, habitability, deposits, rent increases, resolution of housing problems, and conduct mediation and conciliation.
Tenant-Landlord
Counseling and
Dispute Resolution
Project Sentinel 8,571.43 -
Address illegal housing discrimination by investigating complaints, administering audits, conducting community
outreach and education, and seeking redress for victims of such discrimination.
recommended
Funded with
Program Admin Program Admin
Funded with Project Sentinel
Sourcewise
Fair Housing $
$
$
22,061.00
11,691.69
40,000.00
$
$
$
6,000.00
6,000.00
6,000.00
Provide free transit rides to seniors and/or disabled adults to local medical appointments, pharmacies, grocery stores, and to socialize at the Senior Center.
Transit Service $
$
8,571.43
8,571.43
$
$
-
Provide Gilroy residents experiencing homelessness
comprehensive outreach services to meet their basic needs and to connect them with services and resources to help them attain permanent housing.
South County
Compassion Center
Outreach for the
Unhoused 40,000.00
Provide safety net and homeless prevention services such as short-term financial assistance, case management, linkages to resources, and other support services.
St. Joseph's Family Homeless Prevention $
$
83,000.00
20,000.00
$
$
6,000.00
6,000.00
$
$
8,571.43
8,571.42
$
$
-
Center Services
Deliver meals and wellness checks to Gilroy seniors who are living at or below the poverty level and at risk of food insecurity.
The most food-insecure clients may also receive monthly grocery deliveries.
The Health Trust Meals on Wheels 20,000.00
Provide job readiness and soft skills training to prepare at-risk, or individuals experiencing homelessness, for employment, health stabilization, and housing. Participants will earn stipends for their work, providing community clean-up and beautification.
St. Joseph's Family
Center
Deemed
ineligible Gilroy Street Team $ 60,000.00 $
$
- $
$
- $
$
-
Subtotal Total Requested Applications $ 348,678.69 60,000.00 60,000.00 60,000.00 $ 55,264.95 *
9.1 p. 241 of 269
CDBG Program Year 2024-25 Application Funding Allocation (Cont'd) Provide sidewalk and curb ramp improvements to meet
Sidewalk/Curb Ramp accessibility compliance and create safe pedestrian pathways in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.
City of Gilroy
Public Works
$ 99,481.45 + $ 162,466.00
= $ 261,947.45 $
$
320,000.00
268,000.00
$
$
130,000.00
130,000.00
$
$
53,323.00
53,322.00
$
$
183,323.00
183,322.00
$
$
183,323.00
183,322.00
$
$
183,323.00
183,322.00
Repair and
Accessibility Provide home safety repairs for low-income homeowners to Modification Program address urgent needs, as well as minor repairs, accessibility Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley
$ 140,000.00 + $ 118,000.00
= $ 258,000.00 for Low-Income
Homeowners
modifications, and limited rehabilitation.
Install a fire alarm and fire sprinkler system to change occupancy classification of the structure and increase
occupancy limit, to provide historical agricultural education workshops and community events.
Miller Red Barn
Sprinkler System
Deemed
ineligible
Deemed
ineligible The Miller Red Barn $ 50,000.00 $ - $ - $ -
-
BOOST (Business
Operation &
Optimization Support
Tools)
Provide business support and technical assistance to low-to moderate-income microenterprise owners operating in-home family daycares, with fewer than 5 employees.
WeeCare, Inc (DBA -
Upwards)
Deemed
ineligible
Deemed
ineligible $ 152,000.00 $
$
- $
$
- $
Subtotal Total Requested Applications $ 790,000.00 $ 260,000.00 $ Program
admin funded
with formula
only funds
regardless of
option
recommended
$ 106,645.00 366,645.00 366,645.00 366,645.00 $ 239,481.45 $ 280,466.00 Address illegal housing discrimination by investigating complaints, administering audits, conducting community
outreach and education, and seeking redress for victims of such discrimination.
Project Sentinel Fair Housing $
$
-
-
$ - $ 22,061.00 $ 22,061.00
Program
Administration
Staff time and consultant time for administration and
management of the CDBG program City of Gilroy $
$
80,000.00
80,000.00
$
$
57,939.00
80,000.00
$
$
57,939.00
80,000.00
$
$
73,686.60
Subtotal 73,686.60
Total $ 1,138,678.69 $ 506,645.00 $ 506,645.00 $ 506,645.00 $ 368,433.00 $ 280,466.00 i. Equal Distribution Option – Fund all public service applications equitably with funds available * For PY 2023-24, $37,312.61 was also allocated to the
Summer Day Camp Program.
ii. Non-Duplication Option – Fund fair housing through program administration; remove duplicative public service applications and those applications that did not meet requirements of the NOFA iii. Evaluation Based Option – Fund fair housing through program administration, and fund only public service applications with the highest evaluations Eligible Uses
Funding Amount Program
Administration
(20% Cap)
Public Service Non-Public
(15% Cap) Service
2024-25 Formula Funds (Estimate)
Prior Years' Resources
PY 2024-25 Total
$
$
$
400,000.00
106,645.00
506,645.00
$
$
60,000.00
--
$
$
$
260,000.00
106,645.00
366,645.00
$ 80,000.00
--
60,000.00 $ 80,000.00
9.1 p. 242 of 269
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: City Council Downtown Committee (Part 3) - Subcommittee Reports and Recommendations –
Code Enforcement
Meeting Date: May 6, 2024
From: Gilroy Downtown Committee
Department: City Council
Submitted By: Gilroy Downtown Committee
Prepared By: Gilroy Downtown Committee
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Promote Economic Development Activities
RECOMMENDATION
Council discussion and direction regarding the report and recommendations provided by the Downtown Committee’s Code Enforcement Subcommittee.
BACKGROUND
The Downtown Committee (Committee) was formed by Council on May 1, 2023, with its first meeting on May 9, 2023. The resolution forming the fifteen-member Brown Act committee established five Council Members as members of the Committee, each to appoint two of the remaining ten seats as detailed in the resolution.
The Committee is charged with reviewing and offering recommendations to improve the Gilroy Downtown. The Committee formed five sub-committees, each with a different focus area relating to improving the downtown. Below are the five subcommittees, in no particular order:
Plywood Removal
Beautification of Downtown
Vacancy Ordinance
Noise Ordinance
Code Enforcement
10.1 p. 243 of 269
City Council Downtown Committee (Part 3) - Subcommittee Reports and Recommendations – Code Enforcement
City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 2 May 6, 2024
Tonight’s presentation from the Committee is for the recommendations developed by the Code Enforcement Subcommittee. Should Council direct staff to proceed with the recommendations, staff will return to the Council to update the department work plans to incorporate the work to implement these efforts. There may be legal and other operational review needed on the recommendations and how to proceed with implementation, which will need to be balanced against the other work currently in the department work plans.
ANALYSIS
The Code Enforcement Subcommittee has provided to Council their recommendations and research information in the attached document. In the document, the subcommittee provides a series of eight recommendations, as well as a summary of their research on the challenges and nature of Code Enforcement within Gilroy.
ALTERNATIVES
Council may issue any direction that it desires relating to these recommendations from the Downtown Committee.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
No detailed financial impact analysis has been conducted. Depending upon the direction of Council, any future actions will have a fiscal impact determined as part of the agenda report for any such agenda item.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
The Downtown Committee has been holding public meetings, including posted agendas monthly. This item was also included on the publicly posted agenda for this meeting.
NEXT STEPS
Staff will proceed towards implementing any Council-issued direction and return to Council with updates to the department work plans to incorporate the direction and work received.
Attachments:
1. Code Enforcement Subcommittee Recommendations and Information
10.1 p. 244 of 269
10.1 p. 245 of 269
10.1 p. 246 of 269
10.1 p. 247 of 269
10.1 p. 248 of 269
10.1 p. 249 of 269
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Customer Service/Relationship Management Program Meeting Date: May 6, 2024
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Administration
Submitted By: Bryce Atkins, Assistant to the City Administrator Prepared By: Bryce Atkins, Assistant to the City Administrator STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Ensure Neighborhood Equity from City Services Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure
RECOMMENDATION
Council receive report and provide direction.
BACKGROUND
Effective customer service is a critical function for local governments, as local governments are primarily a service-oriented sector. This is even more critical as often the services requested may only be available from the municipality, forming a captured customer base. Because of this it is important to provide exceptional customer service.
The City is in the early stages of re-designing how staff will engage and receive customer service requests, the means of fulfilling those service requests, and the manner of contact, updating, and measuring success.
In that effort, the first stage in the process is the establishment of a comprehensive customer service platform that integrates with a few key systems in service delivery that enhance communications regarding customer service requests, internal coordination in responding to requests for service, and tracking and accountability to ensure the services are being provided completely and meeting customer expectations to the greatest extent possible.
ANALYSIS
10.2 p. 250 of 269
Customer Service/Relationship Management Program
City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 6 May 6, 2024
Currently, customer service requests come through several different channels:
• In-person – the customer comes into a city facility and makes a request directly to a staff member.
• Phone call – the customer either calls one of our automated call routing numbers, or an employee’s direct number, and either speaks with a staff member or leaves a voicemail.
• Direct e-mail to a staff member – the customer can e-mail a member of the city staff directly.
• Request submittal through City’s website – The city website has a form for submitting service requests, entitled “Report a Concern”, the form is sent to the Communications and Engagement Office, who then sends the request to a staff member related to the nature of the request.
• Use of associated portals (i.e. “GO Permit” system for Building Division services; CivicRec for recreational programs, Online BillPay system for utility billing, etc.) The channels provided have the following challenges which limits the opportunity to enhance customer service:
1. Inconsistent channels result in inconsistent service levels. As requests come in through various channels, those receiving the requests may send them to different staff members fulfilling similar roles but may not go to the same person each time. Different departments or divisions will approach an issue in light of its perspective and function, which may not always be consistent with others.
2. Service request drops—Due to staff transitions, technical issues, or communications passing through hands having meaning or details becoming muddled, service requests can accidentally be dropped for residents. Based on the communication channel, there is the possibility that no other source of information or record of the request exists, which can result in the request going without resolution or response should the receiver not take action.
3. Resident frustration is a crucial consequence of inconsistent channels. Dropped requests and the need for repeat communication, relaying the same information to different staff members, can significantly add to a resident's frustration. Those who experience excessive frustration may choose not to pursue the service request, leading to unresolved issues and potential dissatisfaction with the City.
Inability to track performance – with most of the channels being requests directed at to or through an individual, many requests are processed with little awareness being possible for managers and directors. The number of pending requests not receiving a response or requests that are encountering real problems in addressing them may not rise to management's attention until a resident becomes extremely irritated or a staff member requests additional support.
Additionally, there is no way for management to track the number or nature of requests being received, as service requests are generally decentralized.
4. Duplicate requests/assumption of other parties reporting – there are times where multiple residents call in on the same issue, and other times where residents may
10.2 p. 251 of 269
Customer Service/Relationship Management Program
City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 6 May 6, 2024
assume another has called in a matter already, when no such service request has made. This can lead to unnecessary resident activity, and additional staff members working on the same issue concurrently without mutual awareness, or the underreporting of an issue that can be addressed to maintain or enhance the living experience of the resident(s).
5. Internal routing issues – with staffing changeover, and requests being sent to employees in departments or divisions other than those handling the subject matter of the request, which happens with some level of frequency, resident requests can become delayed or be lost in process. Additionally, concerns about who to route the request can result in staff time consumption in trying to identify the right personnel to address a request.
The City recently procured the services of CivicPlus and their customer relationship management software, SeeClickFix! (SCF). CivicPlus is one of the major software-as-aservice platform providers in the public sector. The City has purchased and maintains licenses for several of their platforms (CivicEngage for the City’s website, CivicRec for the Recreation Division’s class management and registration program, and now SCF for customer service/relationship management).
SCF is an online portal that can take both web browser and mobile application submission of resident requests and complaints, including location and residentprovided data that is then processed and routed through established workflows that are maintained by the City. The workflows allow not just one, but multiple staff members, entire divisions and departments to receive requests. The submitted service requests are maintained in a publicly accessible listing until the request is closed, allowing others to see the requests being made. The system allows for messages to be relayed through the system and maintains the dialogue for those who are monitoring the conversation or who may be added to the request to help in its resolution. The system maintains the records and can be used to help assess the requests made, the resolutions accomplished, and helps monitor to ensure resident requests are completed in a timely manner.
The City, as mentioned above, will have a customized mobile application. This allows residents and visitors from their mobile devices to take pictures, geotag or “drop a pin” at a specific location, and enter details of the issues from the convenience of an application on their commonly-used mobile devices. The application will be available both on Apple and Android devices, and will be customized with the City’s workflow, visual themes, and customized features. This is a significant improvement from the online form on the City’s website, which will be replaced by the customized SCF web portal.
SCF is already integrated with CityWorks, the work order application used by our Public Works Department. It allows the work and information received and entered through the system by our operations staff to be seamlessly integrated and populated with SCF, providing residents a single source to enter service requests while allowing operations
10.2 p. 252 of 269
Customer Service/Relationship Management Program
City of Gilroy City Council Page 4 of 6 May 6, 2024
staff to still use the powerful features of CityWorks for operation order use, planning, and recording of work done. The system also has integration capability with our GIS systems provider. This feature is being analyzed for future information storage, analysis, and reporting licenses. Through its features, SCF will address the challenges identified above through its system features. In order, the system will facilitate:
1. Dedicated and consistent workflows ensure that each matter is handled by the personnel best able to process the request without the guesswork/assumption of which department or division must be contacted. The resident selects the issue they are experiencing, and the system will route the service request to the correct organizational unit or staff member.
2. By receiving the request through the system or City staff logging the request into the system that they receive, the issue will remain as an open item on a pending task list in the system until actively closed. The system maintains the record of all data entered, communications, attachments, and any other associated media and is available for others who might take up the request to resolve it. The original message and clarifying correspondence will remain available to staff and the requestor. With the workflow being able to send to an individual employee but also copying and being on the workflow report of any supervisors, managers, and directors associated with the subject matter, the system maintains the organizational awareness of a pending request despite any turnover, vacations, sick leave, and other circumstances that could otherwise cause the potential loss of the request due to an individual employee’s absence.
3. Through the consistent and available communication channel that retains all submitted information and documented follow-up conversations and helps prevent requests from accidental drops, the system will help reduce frustration in the reporting process and lessen the amount of time the resident and City staff may spend reviewing the request details verbally or in writing if the matter is referred to other staff or other staff is added to help resolve the matter.
4. With the retention of all open and closed requests and the workflow records, the system will be a valuable tool for tracking and monitoring performance overall. It will also be used to troubleshoot issues where a request takes more time to resolve than it should or if staff are encountering issues that may need assistance in addressing service request workload.
5. The system allows the public to see what issues have been reported in the physical area of concern. It will show whether the matter has been reported and where the case stands. It will also allow a resident to see if no request has been submitted for an issue. City staff may also use the feature to identify if a request is a duplicate report of the same issue to avoid duplication of efforts with others to resolve it.
6. The system provides a topical submission method instead of employee-based submissions, which helps route the task correctly at the initial submittal. Should a case be re-routed for any reason, the internal routing does not get lost, accidentally truncated, or modified in the handoff, lessening the likelihood of
10.2 p. 253 of 269
Customer Service/Relationship Management Program
City of Gilroy City Council Page 5 of 6 May 6, 2024
issues or delays in resolving the request. All parties are aware of the re-routed request for transparency, clarity of communication, and efficiency.
System Status
City staff recently held a kick-off meeting with the project implementation team from CivicPlus for this platform. Work has commenced on the development of the system and the development of a custom mobile application to provide residents with the most convenient manner of using the system. The initial phase is setting up the core systems, creating the mobile app development relationship and permissions, and establishing some of the foundational settings for the program. City staff will then develop the workflow maps for requests and complaints and begin working with departments and divisions to identify which staff positions are notified of receiving each request.
Due to the early stage of development, staff does not have examples or proposed renderings of the City’s mobile application. However, several examples of the system are in place for a few other cities in our region. Below are some links to other cities utilizing SCF. Our application for mobile reporting and requests will be customized to Gilroy, and, therefore will look different but have similar functionality:
Milpitas: https://seeclickfix.com/milpitas
Berkeley: https://seeclickfix.com/berkeley
Burlingame: https://seeclickfix.com/burlingame
Dublin: https://seeclickfix.com/dublin_2
Antioch: https://seeclickfix.com/antioch
Menlo Park: https://seeclickfix.com/menlo-park
San Jose: https://seeclickfix.com/san-jose
Alameda: https://seeclickfix.com/us-ca-alameda
San Rafeal: https://seeclickfix.com/san-rafael
Customer Service Enhancement Outlook
The program being designed and implemented should be considered as something other than the ultimate enhancement to customer service, but instead a foundation to it.
From this system, further customer service improvements may be built upon and around the system. This includes the integrations with CityWorks, our GIS system, and potentially others as more system integrations are designed. But technology is only a part of customer service. The system will allow us to analyze response times, create FAQ sheets and more targeted outreach based on reported common issues, identify areas within the City needing support, facilitate future staff training on responding to resident requests based on results, and more.
By encouraging residents and visitors to the community to enter their requests through SCF, the City intends to educate and demonstrate the planned improvements in
10.2 p. 254 of 269
Customer Service/Relationship Management Program
City of Gilroy City Council Page 6 of 6 May 6, 2024
responding to resident needs that using this system provides and using that data to help guide further customer service improvements.
The City is not simply adding a customer service initiative or new effort but working to make it a basis of its business practice and part of the organizational culture. This is instilling the essential nature of customer service improvement as an ongoing, iterative process: to take a step in enhancing customer service, adopt it as standard operating procedure and value, then take the next step of improvement, embrace it, and so on, always seeking to improve service for our residents and visitors.
ALTERNATIVES
Council may provide any direction as may be desired relating to the customer service program and efforts of the City.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
None at this time, as this is simply an informational item. Any direction will be analyzed for its fiscal impact. The current cost of the program is $47,000 per year. This includes the platform, unlimited users, and customized mobile application development. The price will be shared across all significant funds of the City, as the program will serve residents submitting service requests, logging reports, questions, and complaints for general, particular revenue, and enterprise fund services and infrastructure.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
As the program nears release and as different components are completed, staff will conduct public outreach and engagement to advertise the new program, the new ways of reporting issues and submitting questions, and any new developments in the City’s ongoing efforts to improve customer service. City staff involved with the project will collaborate with the City’s Communications and Engagement Office to find the best ways to maximize the reach of communications and to do so in a manner that most effectively informs our community of the new developments in customer service.
NEXT STEPS
Staff will continue to develop the program, incorporating any direction that Council may choose to provide. Updates will be provided to the City Council at key stages in the project, and when the program is ready for release.
10.2 p. 255 of 269
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Receive Draft Updates of the City’s Annual Shared Cost Sidewalk Replacement Program
Meeting Date: May 6, 2024
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Public Works
Submitted By: Heba El-Guindy, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Heba El-Guindy, Public Works Director
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure
RECOMMENDATION
This is an information item for City Council to receive and provide feedback on proposed updates of the City’s Annual Shared Cost Sidewalk Replacement Program (PW Project No. 800320).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Public Works Department wishes to streamline implementation of the Annual Shared Cost Sidewalk Replacement Program (Program) through the establishment of a single annual construction contract managed by the City for replacement of damaged sidewalks using a more efficient process. Priority locations are to be set by the City based on staff review of various factors such as along main school routes. There are no proposed changes to the current percentage of cost sharing by abutting property owners. It should also be noted that the proposed Program updates are consistent with the City Municipal Code and the State of California Streets and Highways Code (please refer to Attachment 1).
BACKGROUND
The City has had a share-cost sidewalk repair program since 2006. The City Council approved FY 2024-2028 budget that funds the City’s Annual Shared Cost Sidewalk Replacement Program using the Sidewalk Repair Reserve Fund (Fund 200) for an
10.3 p. 256 of 269
City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 7 April 15, 2024 1 5 annual total amount of $500,000 covering design, construction and construction support (PW Project No. 800320).
The Department of Public Works currently has a Program list of over 140 locations going as far as year 2014. Implementation of improvements has been subject to responsiveness of the abutting property owners and their ability to fund all repairs upfront (such as replacement of sidewalk, curb and gutter, and trees) and later seek reimbursement from the City for applicable items. This ongoing process consumes a significant amount of staff resources, limits the City’s ability to implement improvements in a timely manner, and there is no effective enforcement mechanism.
The current Program identifies the need to repair public sidewalks, which is the responsibility of adjacent property owners and the City offers to share the costs. The Program is not exclusive to residential properties though a majority of the requests and implementation takes place in residential areas. The current Program is set on a reimbursement basis where the City reimburses 50% of the damaged sidewalk replacement cost, 100% of the damaged curb and gutter replacement cost, and 100% of public tree removal and replacement cost. The City allocates a fixed amount of funding to the Program each fiscal year, and when the money is exhausted, the City can no longer accommodate requests for participation in that year’s Program. Below are the currently practiced sidewalk repair program procedures:
• The City is contacted by a property owner or a road user regarding sidewalk deficiencies at a particular location thereby initiating the process. • The City Inspector meets on-site with the property owner to determine the extent of the needed repairs, and the work eligible to be covered by the Program. A project Scope of Work is generated and signed by the City Inspector and the property owner.
• The Scope of Work is used by the property owner to obtain bids for the project.
A list of previously vetted eligible contractors is provided by the City without endorsing or recommending these contractors.
• The property owner then seeks bids from a minimum of three contractors. These vetted contractors have a valid State of California Contractor’s License (A,B,C8,C-12), Worker’s Compensation, general liability insurance, current registration with the California Department of Industrial Relation (DIR), and a current City of Gilroy Business License.
• The City Inspector reviews the bids with the property owner and identify the lowest responsible qualified bidder. The owner must contract with the lowest responsible bidder to be eligible for reimbursement from the Program. • The owner enters into a contract with the contractor with the lowest responsible bid, and a copy of the contract is given to the City before any work begins. • The contractor obtains an encroachment permit and any street tree permits from the City free of charge. If requested, the City Inspector is available to meet with the contractor to go over the work to be done.
10.3 p. 257 of 269
City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 7 April 15, 2024 1 5 • The work is then done by the contractor. The work must be constructed to the City of Gilroy Standards, and inspected and approved by the City Inspector to be eligible for reimbursement.
• The property owner pays the contractor in full for all construction costs, and receives a reimbursement from the City for the City’s portion of the costs upon receipt and approval of the final invoice from the contractor.
Limitations of the existing process are:
• Residents have to pay up front – Residents are asked to front the funds and get reimbursed by the City for applicable items after their construction. • Residents have to do a lot of the work – Obtain three bids, establish a contract with the contractor, and coordinate the construction work. • No consistency of repairs – Participation is throughout the City and work is performed by various contractors resulting in a patchwork of new sidewalk segments and lack of consistency.
• The City is not getting good value for its sidewalk repair dollars – Contractors are only doing small one house at a time repair projects; bid prices are high due to the small scope of projects.
• The process consumes a significant amount of staff resources – This is due to time and efforts spent on reaching out and engaging properties owners, multiple follow-ups in an attempt to initiate the individual projects, sending warning letters without a real enforcement mechanism in place, overseeing various projects spread throughout the year, overseeing various contractors workmanship, and limited ability to prioritize locations based on the level of damage and served pedestrians.
• Limited enforcement - The current Program is set up in such a way that staff identifies the deficient sidewalk, and then sends out a letter to property owner to take a corrective action. There is no additional measure that forces the property owner to take immediate action past this point, and often the letter is disregarded. It should be noted that the State Streets and Highways Code allows for the City to take the lead on implementation and bill the property owner for the work to repair the sidewalk fronting the property (see Attachment 1).
For context, from January 2022 to date, the City has processed approximately 41 sidewalk repair reimbursements under the current Program for a total cost of about $294,000. The individual reimbursement amounts ranged from $600 to $21,000. Of the 41 total, 34 were for residential properties, and the remaining seven (7) were for commercial properties. The reimbursement amount range varies significantly due to the varying scope of service each property owner performed. Lower reimbursement amounts typically only included sidewalk repair, while higher reimbursed amounts included additional items such as curb and gutter, asphalt and tree replacements, which were 100% reimbursed by the City. In addition, given that procurements were done on an individual basis, the unit prices paid also vary for each reimbursement. Below table represents the average sidewalk repair cost reimbursed as part of large and small jobs.
The average owner share of 50% of the sidewalk repair is between $1,500 to $2,800.
10.3 p. 258 of 269
City of Gilroy City Council Page 4 of 7 April 15, 2024 1 5 The City currently has a comprehensive database of sidewalk and curb ramp deficiencies throughout the city. In the spring of 2019, City Council funded a project to identify and assess the deficient sidewalks and curb ramps throughout the city, and the retained firm (Streetscan) used video and Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology to perform this project. This developed database is available and has been used for example in determining locations of new curb ramps constructed using CDBG funds.
Proposed updates to the process of implementing the City’s Annual Shared Cost Sidewalk Replacement Program are listed below:
• Identification of sidewalk repairs is carried out by City staff in an equitable manner throughout the city taking into account the existing levels of deficiency, served traffic generators such as schools, reported concerns, and other rating factors and based on the available database.
• City staff notify the property owners in writing of the assessed deficiencies, as well as provide an explanation of the Program including financial responsibility of the property owners and cost sharing, work planned by the City and associated invoicing of the property owners following project construction, and consequences of lack of payment by a reasonably set due date. • The Public Works CIP project is prepared for all sidewalk repairs including applicable work such as tree removal, replacement of curb and gutter, pavement repair, replacement of driveway approaches, and replacement of sidewalk segments. The CIP project is then advertised for bid, the contract is awarded, the property owners are notified in advance of the work, and the sidewalk work is completed.
• Following completion of the project, the City sends an invoice to each of the impacted property owners stating the actual share of the cost with a payment due date of 90 days from the date of the invoice. A reminder is sent to the property owners 30 days in advance of the due date. A payment arrangement option will also be made available for those wishing to request one, with a not to exceed term of six months.
• If the property owners do not pay in full or fail the payment arrangement, their fair share cost is applied as a lien against their property, and is collected through the annual special assessment collection process on their annual property tax bill. • The proposed cost sharing is consistent with current practice as follows:
10.3 p. 259 of 269
City of Gilroy City Council Page 5 of 7 April 15, 2024 1 5 o Sidewalk Replacement Caused by a Private Tree – 100% Property Owner Cost
o Sidewalk Replacement Caused by a Public Tree – 50% City Cost / 50% Property Owner Cost
o Private Tree Replacement – 100% Property Owner Cost
o Public Tree Replacement – 100% City Cost
o Curb and Gutter Replacement Caused by a Public or a Private Tree – 100% City Cost
o Driveway Approach Replacement – 100% Property Owner Cost o Limit City cost share to repairs adjacent to individual commercial properties to $30,000 (the currently practiced limit is $20,000).
ANALYSIS
Anticipated advantages of the proposed process updates:
• There is no up-front large sum of money out of pocket from the property owner – The City funds all project repairs and invoice the property owner for only their share of the work.
• There is significantly less work for the homeowner – The City takes the lead on coordinating the project, the bids and the construction. The only work for the property owner is to pay the invoiced payment share.
• Improve efficiency and increase the amount of work performed annually towards the City’s strive for a walkable and accessible street system. At the end of the annual project, there would be no patchwork performed at uncoordinated locations by various contractors.
• Increase the amount of repairs citywide using the same amount of annual funds – Sidewalk repairs are advertised under a single project. The bids would be lower since the expected price for repairs would be lower due to volume (i.e. lower unit bid price) and less mobilization costs. This in turn would increase productivity using the same amount of funds allocated annually. • Reduce demands on staff resources by increasing efficiency – Less time and effort will be needed for Program administration and coordination. For example, the City Inspector will need to coordinate with one contractor’s team and focus attention on quality control, thereby replacing the current piecemeal approach.
Disadvantage of the proposed changes:
• While this approach is both allowed by the current City of Gilroy Code and the State of California Streets and Highways Code, one potential issue would be the uncertainty of property owners paying their fair share, and the City having to lien private properties for lack of payment.
Timeline for implementation:
10.3 p. 260 of 269
City of Gilroy City Council Page 6 of 7 April 15, 2024 1 5 Based on City Council consideration and review during the May 6th meeting (Draft Updates) and further consideration for approval during the June 17th meeting (Revised Program Updates incorporating comments), staff wishes to commence implementation of an improved process starting with the upcoming fiscal year.
ALTERNATIVES
Example alternatives to the staff proposed updates can be:
- To retain the current City’s Annual Shared Cost Sidewalk Replacement Program without any changes;
- The City to fully fund 100% of all repairs without seeking cost sharing by property owners; or,
- The City to fully fund all repairs without seeking cost sharing of only low-income owner occupied properties (Determined per the California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) Program) of residential properties.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The City Council approved the FY 2024-2028 Capital Improvement Program budget that funds the City’s Annual Shared Cost Sidewalk Replacement Program using the Sidewalk Repair Reserve Fund (Fund 200) for an annual total amount of $500,000. The amount is intended to cover design, construction and construction support (PW Project No. 800320). No changes to the currently approved budget are recommended by staff.
Staff recommends utilizing funds to remain by the end of June 2024 (a preliminary estimate of about $280,000 after the ongoing reimbursements) to fund minor repairs such as shaving sidewalks uplifted by up to two inches under a separate/second annual contract for four fiscal years, FY 2025-2028. This recommendation aims to expedite repairs throughout the city and reduce demands on the overall annual Program. It should also be noted that the referenced minor repairs are typically carried out by different type of contractual services.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
In addition to the public hearing opportunities during the City Council meetings on May 6 th (Draft Program Updates) and on June 17th (Revised Program Updates incorporating feedback comments), City staff will also conduct public outreach through a social media campaign to encourage the community’s participation and seek their input.
NEXT STEPS
Review and incorporate applicable comments shared by City Council and community members as part of revising the City’s Sidewalk Repair and Replacement Program.
Staff will return to the City Council on June 17th, 2024 for consideration and approval of the revised Program Updates and commence implementation of the Program under a single annual contract commencing in FY 2025.
10.3 p. 261 of 269
City of Gilroy City Council Page 7 of 7 April 15, 2024 1 5 Attachment:
1. Applicable City and State Code Sections
10.3 p. 262 of 269
1 Attachment 1
Applicable City and State Code Sections
City of Gilroy Sidewalk Ordinance
The Gilroy Municipal Code currently requires an adjacent property owner to maintain the adjacent sidewalk area. If not maintained, the code allows for the City to make the repairs and bill or lien the property owner for the unpaid work:
ARTICLE X. MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF PUBLIC USE EASEMENT AREA, Section 20.115 – Maintenance and Repair of Public Use Easement Area – Sub-section b indicates that:
(b) The owners of lots or portions of lots subject to a public use easement area, and persons in possession of such lots by virtue of any permit or right (“property owners”) shall repair and maintain such public use easement areas and pay the costs and expenses therefore, including a charge for the City’s costs of inspection and administration whenever the City awards a contract for such maintenance and repair, and including the costs of collection of assessments for the costs of maintenance and repair under subsection (a), above, of this section or handling of any lien placed on the property due to failure of the property owner to promptly pay such assessments. The property owners shall have the primary and exclusive duty to perform such repairs and maintenance, whether or not the City has notified the property owners of the need for such repairs or maintenance or has performed similar maintenance or repairs in the past.
State of California Streets and Highways Code Related to Sidewalk Chapter 22 of the Streets and Highways Code, Article 2 on Maintenance of Sidewalks states:
The owners of lots or portions of lots fronting on any portion of a public street or place when that street or place is improved or if and when the area between the property line of the adjacent property and the street line is maintained as a park or parking strip, shall maintain any sidewalk in such condition that the sidewalk will not endanger persons or property and maintain it in a condition which will not interfere with the public convenience in the use of those works or areas save and except as to those conditions created or maintained in, upon, along, or in connection with such sidewalk by any person other than the owner, under and by virtue of any permit or right granted to him by law or by the city authorities in charge thereof, and such persons shall be under a like duty in relation thereto. Ca. Sts. and High. Code § 5610
Chapter 22 of the Code also provides further direction related to a City’s right to maintain public sidewalk along the frontage of a private property. The first section below specifies that the Superintendent of Streets (City Engineer by reference) may, after providing sufficient notice to a property owner, arrange for repairs to be made, and for the property owner to be billed for those repairs:
The notice shall particularly specify what work is required to be done, and how it is to be done, and what materials shall be used in the repair and shall further specify that if the repair is not commenced within two weeks after notice is given and diligently and without interruption prosecuted to completion, the superintendent of streets shall make such repair, and the cost of the same shall be a lien on the property.
10.3 p. 263 of 269
2 The Code goes further to say that the legislative body (City Council) may then place a lien on the property for failure to pay:
The cost of the repair may be assessed by the legislative body against the parcel of property fronting upon the sidewalk upon which such repair was made, and such cost so assessed, if not paid within five days after its confirmation by the legislative body, shall constitute a special assessment against that parcel of property, and shall be a lien on the property for the amount thereof which lien shall continue until the assessment and all interest thereon is paid, or until it is discharged of record.
10.3 p. 264 of 269
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Approval of an Exception to the CalPERS 180-Day Waiting Period for Work After Retirement for Ogarita
Carranza (Retired Annuitant) to Serve in an Extra Help
Position in the Public Works Department
Meeting Date: May 6, 2024
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Administrative Services
Submitted By: LeeAnn McPhillips, Administrative Services and Human Resources Director / Risk Manager
Prepared By: LeeAnn McPhillips, Administrative Services and Human Resources Director / Risk Manager
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Not Applicable
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy approving the exception to the CalPERS 180-day wait period and appointment of Ogarita Carranza to an extra help position in the Public Works Department.
BACKGROUND
The Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act (PEPRA) made substantial changes to public employee pension laws in California. One of those changes requires retired annuitants to be separated from employment for 180 days before returning to work for an employer that belongs to the same retirement system from which the retiree receives a pension. An exception can be made if the governing body adopts a resolution to waive the separation period. The waiver allows the employer to hire a retired annuitant to perform work of a limited duration to include special projects and elimination of backlogged work.
Specifically, Government Code Section 21224 allows agencies to hire retirees to extra help positions to perform work of limited duration to include work in excess of what
10.4 p. 265 of 269
Approval of an Exception to the CalPERS 180-Day Waiting Period for Work After Retirement for Ogarita Carranza (Retired Annuitant) to Serve in an Extra Help Position in the Public Works Department
City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 3 May 6, 2024
permanent employees can do. Government Code Section 7522.56 allows the governing body to adopt a 180-day exception resolution certifying the nature of the employment and that the employment is necessary to for the completion of critically needed work before the 180 days has passed.
Currently, extra help is needed in the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department. There is critical administrative work that needs to be completed and we are about to hire a new employee that will need to be trained. Retired annuitant Ogarita Carranza has the experience and expertise to perform the essential Analyst level work in the Public Works Department. Ms. Carranza served in the role of Management Analyst for Gilroy Public Works for almost seven years, and she also served in a similar capacity for another public agency for many years before working for the City of Gilroy.
Ms. Carranza retired on December 28, 2023, and began collecting a pension from California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS). She is willing to return to temporary, at-will, limited duration work to assist the City of Gilroy Public Works Department.
Ms. Carranza will be assigned to perform Analyst level work including, but not limited to:
• Budget analysis and administration
• Contract administration
• Training of newly hired Analysts
• Capital Improvement Project financial tracking
• Processing workflow items in Tyler Munis Financial System • Preparing staff reports
• GASB 34 reporting
• Prepare SB 1 funding documentation
• Assist with the preparation of Requests for Proposals and/or bid documents Ms. Carranza will work under the direction of the Public Works Director. She will work no more than 960 hours in a fiscal year and the city will comply with all aspects of the Government Code related to the employment of retired annuitants. Having this extra help will assist the Public Works Department during a time of high workload demand.
Ms. Carranza will be paid $58.50 per hour and will receive no other benefits or incentives.
ALTERNATIVES
The alternatives would be not to approve the 180-day exception resolution and the city would need to identify someone else to assist with the work or go without the extra help.
These alternatives are not recommended as the help is urgently needed and Ms.
Carranza has the experience to immediately add value to the work team.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
10.4 p. 266 of 269
Approval of an Exception to the CalPERS 180-Day Waiting Period for Work After Retirement for Ogarita Carranza (Retired Annuitant) to Serve in an Extra Help Position in the Public Works Department
City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 3 May 6, 2024
There are salary savings within the department to cover the cost of this temporary extra help. As such, there is no new fiscal impact associated with this action.
CONCLUSION
To ensure continuity in the work completed by the Public Works Department and to acquire the extra help needed to complete the current work as well as backlogged work, it is recommended that the City Council adopt the resolution allowing the 180-day exception to employ a CalPERS retired annuitant (Ogarita Carranza).
NEXT STEPS
Upon Council approval, staff will provide the resolution to CalPERS and complete the extra help hiring process so Ms. Carranza can begin work right away.
Attachments:
1. Gilroy City Council Resolution Exception to 180-Day Wait Period for Retired Annuitant Ogarita Carranza
10.4 p. 267 of 269
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF GILROY APPROVING AN EXCEPTION TO THE
CALPERS 180 DAY WAIT PERIOD OF OGARITA
CARRANZA FOR EXTRA HELP WORK IN THE PUBLIC
WORKS DEPARTMENT
WHEREAS, in compliance with Government Code Section 7522.56, the City of Gilroy (“City”) must provide the California Public Retirement System (“CalPERS”) this certification resolution when hiring a retiree before 180 days has passed since his or her retirement date; and WHEREAS, Ogarita Carranza (“Carranza”) retired from the City in the position of Management Analyst effective December 28, 2023, and is beyond the normal retirement age; and WHEREAS, Section 7522.56 requires that post-retirement employment commence no earlier than 180 days after the retirement date of December 28, 2023, without this certification resolution; and WHEREAS, Section 7522.56 provides that this exception to the 180-day wait period shall not apply if the retiree accepts any type of retirement incentive; and WHEREAS, the City and Carranza certify that Carranza has not and will not receive a Golden Handshake or any other retirement-related incentive; and WHEREAS, the City Administrator hereby appoints Carranza as an extra help retired annuitant to perform analyst duties for the City of Gilroy Public Works Department consistent with Government Code Section 21224 effective on or about May 13, 2024; and WHEREAS, no matters, issues, terms, or conditions related to this extra help employment and appointment have been or will be placed on a consent calendar; and WHEREAS, the employment shall be limited to no more than 960 hours per fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the compensation paid to retirees cannot be less than the minimum nor exceed the maximum monthly base salary paid to other employees performing comparable duties divided by 173.33 to equal the hourly rate; and
WHEREAS, the minimum base salary for the Management Analyst is $7,603.92 per month and the hourly equivalent is $43.87, and the maximum base salary for this position is $10,139.67 and the hourly equivalent is $58.50; and
WHEREAS, the hourly rate paid to Carranza will be $58.50; and WHEREAS, Carranza has not and will not receive any other benefit, incentive compensation in lieu of benefits or any other form of compensation in addition to this hourly pay rate.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Gilroy hereby finds, determines, and resolves as follows:
1. The City Council has considered the full record before it, which may include but is not limited to such things as the staff report, testimony by staff and the public, and other materials and evidence submitted or provided to it. Furthermore, the recitals set forth above are found to be true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.
10.4 p. 268 of 269
Resolution No. 2024-XX
Waive 180-Day Wait Period to Hire a Retired Annuitant - Carranza City Council Regular Meeting | May 6, 2024
2. The City Council hereby certifies the nature of the employment of Carranza as described herein and finds that this appointment is necessary to complete specialized analytical work of limited duration in support of the Public Works Department, that Carranza has significant experience to complete such work, and that such extra help work is necessary to ensure continuity of the Public Works Department.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6
th day of May, 2024 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
APPROVED:
Marie Blankley, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Beth Minor, Interim City Clerk
10.4 p. 269 of 269